GFY v The Benevolent Society [2024] NSWCATAD 370

GFY v The Benevolent Society [2024] NSWCATAD 370

Special circumstances existed warranting a limited costs order in favour of the applicants: (1) first respondent failed to produce relevant documents and unsuccessfully opposed summons; (2) after expert report received, respondents delayed in resolving proceedings, incurring applicants’ costs from 6 June to 30 June 2024; (3) applicants entitled to 25% of costs in making the costs application; otherwise, parties to bear their own costs. Tribunal acted with caution to avoid hypothetical trial and declined full costs given complexities and protective subject matter.

Parties
First Applicant: GFY; Second Applicant: GFZ; First Respondent: The Benevolent Society; Second Respondent: Department of Communities and Justice
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review (costs Application) / Post Settlement, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs partly awarded in favour of applicants, as detailed in orders.
Legal Topics
Costs, Authorised Carers, Administrative Reviewable Decisions, Special Circumstances, Case Management, Out of Home Care
Administrative Law Equal Opportunity Law Child Protection Costs Authorised Carers Administrative Reviewable Decisions Special Circumstances Case Management +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GFY

First Applicant

GFZ

Second Applicant

The Benevolent Society

First Respondent

Department of Communities and Justice

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review (costs Application) / Post Settlement, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special circumstances exist warranting a costs order under s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the parties unjustifiably disadvantaged another party
  3. 3 Relative strengths of claims between parties where case resolved by settlement

Ratio Decidendi

Special circumstances existed warranting a limited costs order in favour of the applicants: (1) first respondent failed to produce relevant documents and unsuccessfully opposed summons; (2) after expert report received, respondents delayed in resolving proceedings, incurring applicants’ costs from 6 June to 30 June 2024; (3) applicants entitled to 25% of costs in making the costs application; otherwise, parties to bear their own costs. Tribunal acted with caution to avoid hypothetical trial and declined full costs given complexities and protective subject matter.

Court Disposition

Costs partly awarded in favour of applicants, as detailed in orders.

Orders

  • Hearing of costs application dispensed with per s 50(2) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.
  • First respondent to pay applicants’ costs of and incidental to the summons issued to first respondent dated 26 March 2024 and any costs connected to the application to set aside the summons determined on 29 April 2024.